OSNews: http://www.osnews.com/story/16898/Gates_Wants_a_Server_in_Every_Home
Exploring the Future of Computingen-usCopyright 2001-2018, David Adamsadam+nospam@osnews.comTue, 20 Mar 2018 02:35:57 GMThttp://www.osnews.com/images/osnews.gifOSNews.comhttp://www.osnews.com
Market?http://www.osnews.com/thread?199688
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199688It seems to me that there is very little market for Windows "Home Server".
The people who would benefit from and would want such a thing are mainly computer "enthusiasts" and are almost certianly computer literate enough to buy an older PC off eBay, install a large hard drive in it and set up either the version of Windows it is invetably already licenced with or Linux as a file server.
It's not exactly hard in either case.Mon, 08 Jan 2007 23:47:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (mallard)Comments?http://www.osnews.com/thread?199689
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199689WHY does HE want that?

I've read why he is thinking this would be a good idea. (And I don't agree to it).

I think it's $$$Edited 2007-01-08 23:52Mon, 08 Jan 2007 23:51:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (SK8T)Comments...http://www.osnews.com/thread?199693
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199693I think it is a good idea, an easy to setup and cheap storage servers is what I need, I waste lots of time backing up date everytime I need to format my pc or laptop.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 00:00:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (Hiev)CommentsRE: Market?http://www.osnews.com/thread?199696
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199696Anyone that has digital media or documents and wants to ensure they won't lose them due to a harddrive failure, tampering, mistaken deletion, etc., would benefit from a home server. It's largely a set-it-and-forget-it appliance that can provide a central location for your data, guards against data loss, monitors the systems on your network for security/reliability issues, makes it faster and easier to restore your systems, and enables remote access to them.

http://microsoftatces.com/archive/2007/01/08/microsoft-home-server....Tue, 09 Jan 2007 00:02:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (n4cer)CommentsIt's a good idea...http://www.osnews.com/thread?199700
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199700...but as I said in the previous thread on this, I think MS will have its competition cut out for it. Linksys and other hardware manufacturers could offer the same solution at a lower price using FOSS OSes (whether it's Linux, one of the BSDs or OpenSolaris). After all, you just need a fast HD (for video streaming), Ethernet/WiFi connectivity, and a nice Web interface for setup and maintenance.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 00:09:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (archiesteel)CommentsPersonal home servershttp://www.osnews.com/thread?199701
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199701I think that in an ideal world having home servers would be good, as all your data would be stored locally, within the owner's control.

It would further push the idea of a peer-to-peer Internet instead of a one with a dominant privileged-server/unprivileged-client architecture, which is sadly getting somewhat popular nowadays.

It would lead to everyone having their own external IP address, and not being at the mercy of their ISP (think incoming port blocking).

Personally I don't like the idea of capitalist corporations having unrestricted access to my mail, photos or other personal information on their centralised servers.

My opinion is that home servers would be good for the internet users at large, even if it's Microsoft that backs them.

That said, it is hard to judge if all of this would be feasible to implement.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 00:10:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (unavowed)CommentsRE[2]: Market?http://www.osnews.com/thread?199702
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199702Anyone that has digital media or documents and wants to ensure they won't lose them due to a harddrive failure[...]

Except of course if the server hard drive fails. ;-)

I guess the ideal solution would be a solid state HD, but with the kind of capacity you need for this type of device it would cost over 1500$!!Tue, 09 Jan 2007 00:12:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (archiesteel)CommentsThis is an opportunity for Linux...http://www.osnews.com/thread?199703
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199703I would love to see a distro targeted towards this sort of thing. I wonder if the *buntu community are the most likely to have a go...

From what little I know of Linux it seems to speak to just about anything. I have seen a number of reviews of SOHO NAS on Toms Hardware and they all run Linux. This includes product from companies like Intel.

The lack of DRM could also be a strong selling point if marketed correctly.

One could possibly start of with simple file + print and have the option to add functionality as needed.

I'm sure Apple could also come up with a very nice product as well...

MS as a rule don't enter a market unless they can make money. It may not be an instant money maker but the long-term possibilities must be there...

The market for this type of device is wide open at the moment and could be genuinely disruptive (in a good way!)Tue, 09 Jan 2007 00:12:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (Nezumi)CommentsiTVhttp://www.osnews.com/thread?199705
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199705I think this is where the iTV or whatever it will be called when announced will make a bit of a inroad.

Whereas the iTV just pulls off all you Videos, Photos etc off your computer, which makes it much easier to watch them comfortably.

What I would like to see in these devices is the ability to record TV and things, I love my TViX box where I can dump movies and songs, pics onto a hard drive, and watch them on my TV, but if I could record TV straight onto the hard drive, it would make a killing.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 00:16:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (Finchwizard)CommentsRE[2]: Market?http://www.osnews.com/thread?199709
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199709There are a lot of NAS boxes already out there that do this simply by adding your own hard drive. Taking into account the cost of the MS OS and the beefy hardware needed to run it, finding people to fork over that extra cash is going to be a lot more difficult than MS would ever admit to.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 00:20:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (Lettherebemorelight)CommentsRE[3]: Market?http://www.osnews.com/thread?199713
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199713Except of course if the server hard drive fails. ;-)

The server can have multiple drives for redundancy, or the data can be both on the PC and the server ensuring the data exists in at least 2 places.Edited 2007-01-09 00:32Tue, 09 Jan 2007 00:25:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (n4cer)CommentsRE[2]: Market?http://www.osnews.com/thread?199716
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199716It's not the server itself I don't see the need for, its a special version of Windows for it.

An older (P-III) PC can be bought for ~$50 from eBay, a 400GB HDD for ~$100. Therefore you could easily set up a home server for ~$150.
Such a PC would likely be already licenced for Windows (even Win98 would work well enough) and a suitible Linux distro can be obtained for free.

I contend that the average person has no need or desire for a server, so those who want one will almost certianly have the expertise to set one up.

Why do we need a special version of Windows?Tue, 09 Jan 2007 00:32:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (mallard)CommentsLinksys NSLU2 and other NAS deviceshttp://www.osnews.com/thread?199717
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199717There are NAS devices and routers that supports plugging in USB hard drives and acts as a server. I don't see how Windows Home Server has a large market.

For example, I just help a friend set up a Linksys NSLU2 device with external USB one touch hard drives.

For the average joe, isn't it easier to run one of these devices and plug in more USB HDs as needed rather than running a Windows Home Server edition?

On top of that, I would believe the size and cost of devices such as the NSLU2 would be less or equal to the cost of the Windows server.

The only reason I can see a *need* for MS Home server edition is that, due to DRM restrictions, only a MS server with DRM serving support would allow media playback on other computers on the same network.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 00:32:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (flav2000)CommentsRE[3]: Market?http://www.osnews.com/thread?199718
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199718There are a lot of NAS boxes already out there that do this simply by adding your own hard drive. Taking into account the cost of the MS OS and the beefy hardware needed to run it, finding people to fork over that extra cash is going to be a lot more difficult than MS would ever admit to.

I don't consider a 1.8GHz Sempron w/ 512MB RAM beefy (what the HP unit contains -- it's unknown what the minimum specs will be, but I imagine it'll be similar to Windows Server 2003). $500 puts it in line with many NAS units, and this can handle multiple PC's and devices on your network without duplicating data that is the same accross devices.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 00:40:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (n4cer)CommentsRE[3]: Market?http://www.osnews.com/thread?199723
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199723Solid State drives fail too. In fact many flash-based devices have a certain number of writes they can execute before they start to get stale...

Physical degeneration occurs in everything; somethings just survive longer than others.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 00:45:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (DittoBox)CommentsRE[4]: Market?http://www.osnews.com/thread?199727
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199727Multiple drives is preferable (if more expensive), as having data in two different places can be a bit more complicated, especially for stuff that changes (home accounting data, for example). You'd need a versioning system, or at least rsync, to manage it. It can certainly be done, but it's a bit more complex.

I got the idea that the device is destined more for centralized storage than backup anyway (though it would certainly be useful for that as well).Tue, 09 Jan 2007 00:48:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (archiesteel)CommentsRE[4]: Market?http://www.osnews.com/thread?199728
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199728Solid State drives fail too.

True. I wonder which one would last longer if the server is always on and doesn't move...Tue, 09 Jan 2007 00:49:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (archiesteel)CommentsFirst Impressionhttp://www.osnews.com/thread?199731
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199731The first thing that came to mind... triple the amount of zombie PCs, except now running on server-grade systems. The ultimate botnet, now streaming everyone's personal info, photos, and videos... wonderful!Tue, 09 Jan 2007 00:51:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (47ronin)CommentsRE[3]: Market?http://www.osnews.com/thread?199732
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199732It's not the server itself I don't see the need for, its a special version of Windows for it.
An older (P-III) PC can be bought for ~$50 from eBay, a 400GB HDD for ~$100. Therefore you could easily set up a home server for ~$150.
Such a PC would likely be already licenced for Windows (even Win98 would work well enough) and a suitible Linux distro can be obtained for free.

It depends ou what you think "easy" means. The goal for WHS is to allow people to get the benefits of a home server without having to be an admin. If you know how to cobble together a server and don't mind doing so, WHS isn't likely targeted at you.

I contend that the average person has no need or desire for a server, so those who want one will almost certianly have the expertise to set one up.

When the average person loses the data he deems important because he didn't keep regualr backups or know how to setup a RAID array, etc., he'll wish he had, and probably will look for a solution such as WHS.

Why do we need a special version of Windows?

Because it's a purpose-specific product and will be priced according to the functionality offered and the market. It also doesn't need to be in lock-step with general Windows releases.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 00:55:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (n4cer)CommentsRE[4]: Market?http://www.osnews.com/thread?199733
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199733The server can have multiple drives for redundancy, or the data can be both on the PC and the server ensuring the data exists in at least 2 places.

So? The client also can get multiple drives for redundancy - it can even become a "standard practice" when buying a pc - and it's way cheaper than a separate server. And local filesystems can also do internal backups and versioning and all that, without buying a extra server, you know.

And if you want to replicate your data...why replicate it in a "server"....when the other computers in your house could use their unused disk space? Vista could add techonoloy to enable other computers in your house to store encrypted backups of other computers in your home...*THAT* would be interesting

Aditionally, since the server needs to store backups from *ALL* the pcs it means it'll need to have enought storage capacity...your disks in your personal pcs may be half-void but hey, because WHS needs to do backups of the half-filled part for N different computers you may need to go to the store and ask for a extra disk for your WHS server. Weeeee.

Backup devices are certainly useful in many cases, I'd see why you'd want something like WHS in a office. But I don't understand why people would buy WHS for their homes at all, not even enthusiasts. The one useful idea behind it for homes seems to be the fact that you can access the files while the another pc is powered off. And frankly, I'm just not buying a separate and expensive server + pay a extra license OS for that.Edited 2007-01-09 01:04Tue, 09 Jan 2007 00:55:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (diegocg)CommentsRE[5]: Market?http://www.osnews.com/thread?199734
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199734You mean WHS will keep on 24h/365d, doing noise and eating power? Now that would be a good reason for *not* buying it.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 00:59:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (diegocg)CommentsNew MS tactic after wilfully crippling Win Home http://www.osnews.com/thread?199741
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199741It seems Microsoft is now recognizing the need for full-fledged network server capability in the home, after having wilfully crippled this functionality in the Windows home version.

Also, even though I kinda like the idea of a cheap headless box somewhere in a corner, it will take even more price drops in hard disk capacity before we get HUGE hard disks, with enough redundancy to counteract the possibly detrimental effects of a single point of failure for all the PCs around the house.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 01:17:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (vanfruniken)CommentsRE[4]: Market?http://www.osnews.com/thread?199742
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199742It depends ou what you think "easy" means.

"Easy" as in "connect the large hard drive as the secondary master or externally via USB, right click on the icon in 'My Computer' and set up sharing.".
Although with Linux it will be "install the OS, install Webmin and set up sharing from there", slightly more complex.

(Note that the box only needs a monitor for this short proccess. VNC or Remote Desktop can be used for maintanance.)

Even if you first have to install the OS it won't take more than an hour or two.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 01:17:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (mallard)CommentsRE[5]: Market?http://www.osnews.com/thread?199743
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199743So? The client also can get multiple drives for redundancy - it can even become a "standard practice" when buying a pc - and it's way cheaper than a separate server. And local filesystems can also do internal backups and versioning and all that, without buying a extra server, you know.

This is a possibility with Vista's Complete PC Backup, but this isn't as good a solution as maintaining the data on a server because you replicate the same steps per PC, and you waste storage space because you duplicate data that is the same accross multiple PCs.

And if you want to replicate your data...why replicate it in a "server"....when the other computers in your house could use their unused disk space? Vista could add techonoloy to enable other computers in your house to store encrypted backups of other computers in your home...*THAT* would be interesting.

Again, one of the reasons is wasted storage space due to the redundant storage of data that is the same accross PCs and devices on the network. Assuming that isn't an issue, another issue is that those disks are in use as much as you use your computers, so they're probability of failure is higher. There's also the question of what happens when one computer or multiple computers don't have enough reserved capacity to store backups for other PCs or devices.

Aditionally, since the server needs to store backups from *ALL* the pcs it means it'll need to have enought storage capacity...your disks in your personal pcs may be half-filled but hey, because WHS needs to do backups of the half-filled part for N different computers you may need to go to the store and ask for a extra disk for your WHS server.

WHS uses volume shadow copy services/single instance storage for its backups. Files that are common accross PCs and devices (OS and application files, etc.) will only be stored once on the server. Also, when changes are made to the files, only those changes (along with the original) are stored.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 01:18:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (n4cer)CommentsWhy &quot;Home Server&quot;???http://www.osnews.com/thread?199745
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199745I don't know if it's usefull or if there's a market fot it.
What I really know is that the word "Server" doesn't mean anything to Mom or Dad, or our friend average Joe. If they really want to make "Consumer products" they must start naming them like that... why not something like "Home Center", "Media Center Storage"...
I don't know, it just doesn't sound friendly.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 01:28:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (enegeo)CommentsRE[5]: Market?http://www.osnews.com/thread?199746
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199746"Easy" as in "connect the large hard drive as the secondary master or externally via USB, right click on the icon in 'My Computer' and set up sharing.".

Average User: What's secondary master mean? You mean I have to open the box!? I just want to not lose my family photos. Can you install it for me? Oh, USB, that'll backup all my PCs right?

Even if you first have to install the OS it won't take more than an hour or two.

In that time, you could be well on your way backing up your systems with WHS.Edited 2007-01-09 01:31Tue, 09 Jan 2007 01:30:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (n4cer)CommentsRE[6]: Market?http://www.osnews.com/thread?199752
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199752another issue is that those disks are in use as much as you use your computers, so they're probability of failure is higher.

So? The "disk failure" is already happening in a replicated device in other computer in your home. Your data is safe, problem solved. Again, if you want to rely on "data replication" for doing backups in your home, the easier and cheaper idea (the idea that home users want) is to use unused space in all the pcs in your home to make encrypted replications, and save the 600$ that is going to cost you your "backup device". Dude, it's how P2P works, and it DOES work. If that's not enought for you, you aren't a normal user and you're considering proffesional backup solutions _anyway_. In fact, I don't know many people that has ever needed a "backup server". The recycle bin + the versioning build in vista is more enought for 99.9% of the rare home users that need "backups". And have I mentioned that hard disks just don't fail most of the time for most of the people?

This is a possibility with Vista's Complete PC Backup, but this isn't as good a solution as maintaining the data on a server

Sure. And Joe User has been able to buy complete and expensive backup solutions for a long time. I just don't think he is going to do it.

Guys, what I'm arguing is that I don't see WHY Joe User wants a backup server. I can see LOTS of uses for it - in offices and enterprises. You know, "backup" is not a new thing to the industry and lots of proffesionals use it because they actually need it. But WTF, do you really think Joe User is going to think "oooh, a backup device, i'm wasting 500$ on it just in case my hard disk breaks!"?? f--k, joe user doesn't _know_ that hard disks can fail, and he doesn't care.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 01:44:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (diegocg)CommentsRE[2]: Market?http://www.osnews.com/thread?199758
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199758Does that whole idea not negate the actual reason for having digital rights management in the first place ?

I for one dont want people like you copying my new movie/new song/new novel onto a server anywhere !Tue, 09 Jan 2007 01:52:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (raver31)CommentsThe last thing we needhttp://www.osnews.com/thread?199760
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199760Is another computer, running in the home running 24/7

Gee, in an era where energy costs are set to climb dramatically as resources get low, Mr Gates comes up with this great idea. Will he be including renewable energy generation systems to deal with the juice something like this will require?

Not enough that the average US/Australian home has 3 or more Televisions, Air Conditioning, and other electrical crap that isn't necessary and a large drain on the planets resources.

Anyone needing backup solutions should probably be better served by using USB raid system or the likes if they need and also an OS that doesn't include pervaisive DRM and a crap file system (NTFS, New Technology File System) what a joke.

I bet this would just help BG get DRM in the home and also client based licensing pricing based on how many devices/computers you run of this sucker. How many Chinese and Indians could he get to buy this for their homes, then we could see the wonderful effects on the planet as the waters close in around us.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 01:56:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (blitze)Commentsn4cerhttp://www.osnews.com/thread?199761
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199761why does every post that n4cer guy makes look like an advertisement ?Tue, 09 Jan 2007 01:57:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (raver31)CommentsRE[6]: Market?http://www.osnews.com/thread?199763
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199763"Average user" has nothing to do with it, they have no need or desire for a server. Most of them only have one PC, if they want backup, a USB pen or external hard drive would serve just as well.

I re-iterate: I see no need for "Joe Average" to have a "home server". There is a strong correlation between those that want/need this sort of thing and those that could set it up.

I meant to connect via USB to the server (I thought that was obvious). Even connecting it internally is a simple matter of following the instructions that are generally provided with hard drives or are easily found on Google.

In that time, you could be well on your way backing up your systems with WHS.

If someone put together a specialized Linux distro for this sort of thing, which I'm sure they will if it takes off, the set-up time could be reduced to a few minutes (using a LiveCD-based approach). The backup is nothing special, nothing that a cron job or "Scheduled task" couldn't do.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 01:58:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (mallard)CommentsMS smells money just like Xbox 1 and Zune 1http://www.osnews.com/thread?199765
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199765I don't expect much from the first version of this product, but version 2 will definitely make them money or else they wouldn't even be talking it up.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 01:59:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (ubit)CommentsRE: ?http://www.osnews.com/thread?199766
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199766@SK8T

And if he can deliver the features I want, he may get some of my money. Tue, 09 Jan 2007 02:03:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (ronaldst)CommentsRE: n4cerhttp://www.osnews.com/thread?199771
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199771why does every post that n4cer guy makes look like an advertisement ?

Why does every other post look like an advertisement for Linux?Tue, 09 Jan 2007 02:12:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (n4cer)CommentsNot mine...http://www.osnews.com/thread?199772
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199772My FREE server is an old Dell hand-me-down running Linux (free) with no Windows trouble...runs for months at a time and does a of the services needed. Who would spend 500 bucks to pay MS for yet another license?

These guys just won't quit....people keep saying that Linux isn't ready for the desktop (been using it that way happily for 5 years now)...but it's for the SERVER...well...here we go....make it a Linux server and keep Uncle Bill out of it....

Geez....Tue, 09 Jan 2007 02:13:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (Bobmeister)CommentsRE[6]: Market?http://www.osnews.com/thread?199773
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199773Actually, redundent storage shouldn't be an issue. Home Server uses a technology called Single Instance Storage--SIS--which only stores one copy of each unique file. So if you have Office 2007 installed on three different machines, for example, the program files will only be back up once. Likewise, most of the things in the Windows directory shouldn't be copied more than once. Supposedly, this technology has enabled Microsoft to store as much as 19 TB of data in as little as 300 GB in some of there test data sets.

Perhaps a better description is here:

http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/whs_preview.aspTue, 09 Jan 2007 02:13:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (Bryan)CommentsRE: n4cerhttp://www.osnews.com/thread?199774
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199774Because he has this undying belief that MS will provide a simple data storage/conectivity centre for the home that will be bullet proof and never need updating or management utilities. Much unlike any other product that Microsoft has released onto the market.

This is why it will not happen, that coupled with the high costs MS will demand and that given to average Jo it will become an abused/hacked POS in very little time. Computing can deliver such a device but Microsoft can not.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 02:14:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (blitze)CommentsRE[7]: Market?http://www.osnews.com/thread?199775
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199775If someone put together a specialized Linux distro for this sort of thing, which I'm sure they will if it takes off, the set-up time could be reduced to a few minutes (using a LiveCD-based approach). The backup is nothing special, nothing that a cron job or "Scheduled task" couldn't do.

And who will market this specialized distro so that average users can buy a box, plug it in, walk through a few configuration steps, and be done? A cron job or scheduled task would likely take more time and disk space for the backup, and backup is still only one aspect of WHS.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 02:20:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (n4cer)CommentsRE: This is an opportunity for Linux...http://www.osnews.com/thread?199777
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199777There are LOTS of distros that do this sort of thing....most with web-ONLY management interfaces that require zero command line etc...

Most modern PCs are almost silent, and power consumption of a PC with no monitor isn't much more than a couple of lights. I leave my 2 workstations on 24/7, and it's maybe an extra 5 bucks a month.

Or just tuck the server away in a media closet somewhere?

Regardless, very flawed argument.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 02:23:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (jayson.knight)CommentsRE: Linksys NSLU2 and other NAS deviceshttp://www.osnews.com/thread?199782
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199782NSLU2 is the way to go. I run it and Twonky. A complete media center and home server for less than $200. Plus it is silent and draws hardly any power.

Maybe I can get rid of twonky and be 100% open source.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 02:26:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (jonsmirl)CommentsApple, please steal this and make it betterhttp://www.osnews.com/thread?199783
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199783Reading the Ars summary, they've really got some excellent ideas. Apple needs to make a similar box. I totally love the idea of syncing files(no, .Mac doesn't count for syncing gigs across machines), account info and backup.

One can certainly homegrow some of this, but it's that last 10% that kills you...Tue, 09 Jan 2007 02:28:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (bubbayank)CommentsTo Everyone Who Says This Market Is Limitedhttp://www.osnews.com/thread?199784
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199784Right now, yes it is...but that's because this market really doesn't exist yet, and isn't that the point of creating new products...to "create" a new market for them?

Five years ago, the market for Media Center type OS's didn't exist, yet the market for them is huge now. Ten years ago people scoffed at the idea of having a gaming hub (ala XBox/PS, etc) doing anything more than just playing games, yet now they run full blown OS's and can be used as a full fledged media hub. Just a couple of years ago, homes with more than 1 PC were the exception, now they are the norm.

The reason most of us don't see this as a marketable product is because we are technically savvy enough to do what everyone else is saying here...buy a used PC, install whatever OS we want on it, configure it, etc. The rest of the world doesn't care about stuff like that...just give them a turnkey solution that plugs into an existing network and configures itself, et voila...instant market. My own father (who's as technical as a nun) has been asking me questions about something similar to this for a while now...he wants a setup where he can have all of his movies/music/photos/etc centrall stored, and can be accessed throughout the house from a variety of devices (other PCs, TV's, A/V equipment, etc) without needing to trudge around loading up discs, fiddling with equipment, etc.

The market is definitely there, folks have been wanting something like this for a while, but are simply unaware of the terminology behind it like "server" or "OS" or whatever...they want their data in a central location, and to be accessible from anywhere at any time w/o having to worry about the intricacies of how to go about doing it.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 02:33:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (jayson.knight)CommentsRE[2]: n4cerhttp://www.osnews.com/thread?199785
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199785Because he has this undying belief that MS will provide a simple data storage/conectivity centre for the home that will be bullet proof and never need updating or management utilities. Much unlike any other product that Microsoft has released onto the market.

I actually believe it will require updating and management, but most of this will happen automatically via Windows/Microsoft Update. And of course, you can add storage as necessary, and it's much easier to slide in a hotpluggable drive bay than it is to deal with internal storage on multiple PCs.

Computing can deliver such a device but Microsoft can not.

Computing can't deliver such a device because technology changes, and the device would need to be updated at some point no matter who made it. Part of the value of WHS is that it can be updated to improve how it works and what it offers, and maintain compatibility as your client devices change.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 02:35:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (n4cer)CommentsRE: It's a good idea...http://www.osnews.com/thread?199786
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199786But you forget one VERY important factor in all of that: Windows has very strong brand recognition, especially when it will no doubt integrate much better (and easier) into existing Windows home networks. That alone will sell almost everyone on it, including someone like myself who would actually prefer a NAS based solution. But if it plays better with my Windows machines, why not?

I see this space heating up quite a bit. A good indication of this is look how popular consumer level NAS solutions are now...even just a year or so ago no one outside of a server room had ever even heard of NAS, now my grandma even knows what that means.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 02:39:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (jayson.knight)CommentsRE: Linksys NSLU2 and other NAS deviceshttp://www.osnews.com/thread?199789
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199789"There are NAS devices and routers that supports plugging in USB hard drives and acts as a server. I don't see how Windows Home Server has a large market."

You just answered your own statement...look at the size of the market for consumer level NAS devices right now, that space is exploding. If MS can get terabyte sized systems offered for under a grand w/ WHS running on it, they'll succeed and then some.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 02:43:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (jayson.knight)CommentsRE: Why &quot;Home Server&quot;???http://www.osnews.com/thread?199790
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199790I seriously doubt that'll be the final name, it's much too simple compared to MS's other product names...perhaps something like "Windows Vista Networking/Storage/Backup/Bake You A Cake/ (Starter/Premium/Ultimate) Edition 2007" would better fall in line.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 02:45:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (jayson.knight)CommentsClose, but no cigar.http://www.osnews.com/thread?199793
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199793Let's forget that alot of potential users have ISP server agreements that technically prohibit using one of these (as stupid as it may sound, but read your Verizon or Comcast TOS).

The thing is that the MS vision is a unit that's basically a PC with Windows and just enough web-sugar on top to permit remote admin without their usually obtuse admin stuff.

That's fine and dandy, but the fact of the matter is that it still leaves you with something that is still more difficult to setup than current NAS products (including FreeNAS for you Linux fans), hardware that uses considerably more power and that is more expensive. On top of that, it's running an operating system with all sorts of superfluous bits to it that just means that there's that much more places for things to go bad.

I'll buy that a NAS is a good idea. Unfortunately, my impression from reading Microsoft's marketing copy on it is that they don't get it.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 02:55:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (SpasmaticSeacow)CommentsRE[7]: Market?http://www.osnews.com/thread?199794
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199794Guys, what I'm arguing is that I don't see WHY Joe User wants a backup server. I can see LOTS of uses for it - in offices and enterprises. You know, "backup" is not a new thing to the industry and lots of proffesionals use it because they actually need it. But WTF, do you really think Joe User is going to think "oooh, a backup device, i'm wasting 500$ on it just in case my hard disk breaks!"?? f--k, joe user doesn't _know_ that hard disks can fail, and he doesn't care.

I've had at least 3 harddrives fail among Joe Users that I know. My dad is now running a mirrored RAID set after losing data to harddrive failure. I bought a Seagate Baracuda not long ago that was as good as DOA and had to be shipped back for replacement (Vista warned me the drive was failing not long after I installed the drive). Joe User likely doesn't know he needs a backup solution if he has never lost data. When he does, he'll understand the need for it. But knowing he needs it, doesn't mean he wants to spend a lot of time setting it up, thus the various options MS offers (Windows Backup, CPC Backup, OneCare, WHS, etc.). Take your pick depending on your needs or choose another solution if you care to manage every detail.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 02:57:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (n4cer)CommentsRE[7]: Market?http://www.osnews.com/thread?199802
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199802I re-iterate: I see no need for "Joe Average" to have a "home server".

At one time certain execs at HP thought there was no need for the average person at home to even have a computer. We all see how accurate that one turned out to be!

Joe User already has a server at home, a lot of people are sharing out music and videos over their home LAN using shared folders etc.

The fact that routers have become common place in the home shows that joe user is capable of learning and connecting the dots when the package is fairly straightforward.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 03:14:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (Bit_Rapist)CommentsRE[2]: It's a good idea...http://www.osnews.com/thread?199804
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199804But you forget one VERY important factor in all of that: Windows has very strong brand recognition, especially when it will no doubt integrate much better (and easier) into existing Windows home networks. That alone will sell almost everyone on it, including someone like myself who would actually prefer a NAS based solution. But if it plays better with my Windows machines, why not?

Yes and no. Windows' name recognition won't necessarily translate into more sales, because it's not really a popular brand other than by the fact that it's installed on any PC out there. The only MS brands to do well in a *competitive* market are Xbox and Hotmail/MSN (but that's not really a consumer product).

As for making it work better with Windows than competitive product, this would mean that MS would take advantage of certain hidden protocols or APIs, which would open it wide to another anti-trust lawsuit. There's no reason why a Linux/BSD device with Samba couldn't do just as good a job (for cheaper in license fees). If there's one thing Unix-like systems are, it's storing data and serving it over a network, and that's exactly what this box would do.

As I said, I don't think it's a bad idea, and if MS can start the ball rolling I think it's another great opportunity for others to jump in with FOSS-based devices.

A good indication of this is look how popular consumer level NAS solutions are now...even just a year or so ago no one outside of a server room had ever even heard of NAS, now my grandma even knows what that means.

Maybe your grandma is thinking of something else. From the NAS disambiguation page on WP... ;-)

# Network access server, also known as a terminal server
# Network Application Support
# Network-attached storage
# Network Audio SystemTue, 09 Jan 2007 03:33:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (archiesteel)CommentsRE[3]: It's a good idea...http://www.osnews.com/thread?199806
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199806As for making it work better with Windows than competitive product, this would mean that MS would take advantage of certain hidden protocols or APIs, which would open it wide to another anti-trust lawsuit. There's no reason why a Linux/BSD device with Samba couldn't do just as good a job (for cheaper in license fees).

They don't need to take advantage of hidden APIs or protocols, just use APIs that are native to the Windows platform, like VSS.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 03:44:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (n4cer)CommentsRE: ...http://www.osnews.com/thread?199807
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199807Well, let's hope you're not going to use that Home server to backup your data because you're formating your Windows O.S.....since that is probably what your Home server will be running ;-)Tue, 09 Jan 2007 03:45:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (elektrik)CommentsRE[4]: It's a good idea...http://www.osnews.com/thread?199809
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199809They don't need to take advantage of hidden APIs or protocols, just use APIs that are native to the Windows platform, like VSS.

Yes, that's the point I was making. This doesn't give MS a competitive advantage. Serving files and providing other network services can be done by a competitor using FOSS software.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 04:10:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (archiesteel)CommentsPreview of WHS with screenshots http://www.osnews.com/thread?199811
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199811I'm not sure if anyone posted this yet. This has screenshots of the UI in WHS.

http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/whs_preview.aspTue, 09 Jan 2007 04:38:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (ubit)CommentsTa but no ta very muchhttp://www.osnews.com/thread?199814
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199814Thanks, but I already have a Home Server(TM). It cost me all of £100 off eBay, provides a generous amount of storage with hardware RAID5 failover, and provides every type of server (web, database(s), SSH, rsync, Samba, Bittorrent, print/scan to Windows and Linux clients, Radius for my WLAN) I currently desire, and anything else I might need in future -- guaranteed.

Oh, and besides all the above provided by Linux, it came with a copy of Windows NT 4.0 Server thrown in. But I haven't found a use for that yet :/

Yes, I'm aware that the above sounds arrogant and flamebaity as f***. But honestly, I don't see the point of this.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 04:56:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (Havin_it)CommentsRE[5]: It's a good idea...http://www.osnews.com/thread?199815
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199815Yes, that's the point I was making. This doesn't give MS a competitive advantage. Serving files and providing other network services can be done by a competitor using FOSS software.

Functionality is only part of the solution. If they can't match usability and provide a packaged product that's easy to setup, and that people actually know is available, WHS still wins.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 05:00:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (n4cer)CommentsFree Linux NAS solutionhttp://www.osnews.com/thread?199816
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199816Turn any PC into a NAS

Use NASLite to configure a dedicated storage server
in less than five minutes

http://www.pcquest.com/content/linux/2005/105041201.aspTue, 09 Jan 2007 05:02:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (nedvis)CommentsRE[6]: It's a good idea...http://www.osnews.com/thread?199817
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199817Functionality is only part of the solution. If they can't match usability and provide a packaged product that's easy to setup, and that people actually know is available, WHS still wins.

Why wouldn't they be able to match usability and provide an easy setup? It's not rocket science.

I know you're a die-hard MS supporter, but that doesn't change the fact that MS has a hard time penetrating new markets, and if there's any interest in this kind of device, it's only a matter of time before competitors jump in.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 05:05:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (archiesteel)CommentsRE: New MS tactic after wilfully crippling Win Home http://www.osnews.com/thread?199828
http://www.osnews.com/thread?1998281 TB for under $400 US is too expensive for you? http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070105-8559.htmlTue, 09 Jan 2007 06:11:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (phoenix)CommentsRE[7]: It's a good idea...http://www.osnews.com/thread?199830
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199830Why wouldn't they be able to match usability and provide an easy setup? It's not rocket science.
I know you're a die-hard MS supporter, but that doesn't change the fact that MS has a hard time penetrating new markets, and if there's any interest in this kind of device, it's only a matter of time before competitors jump in.

It may not be rocket science, but it doesn't always happen. Look at MCE vs similar solutions. How many competing solutions are marketed so the average user actually knows they're available? How many are available as a packaged product that allows the user to get started with minimal configuration? Many advanced users who have used competing products for their free cost of acquisition and/or tweakability have either switched completely to MCE or chosen it as the system they use for their family, in part, because it was less hassle, well integrated, and well supported. The same factors will apply to WHS vs its competition.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 06:24:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (n4cer)CommentsRE: Close, but no cigar.http://www.osnews.com/thread?199831
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199831(including FreeNAS for you Linux fans)

Those that need/want a server are the same people that know how to install a hard drive or set up a "Scheduled task" to backup their documents.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 07:15:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (mallard)CommentsRE: It's a good idea...http://www.osnews.com/thread?199836
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199836True, there has been lot of similiar smaller scale systems. Mostly they been network devices with HDD inside. But fact is that those lack several things that Home Server will have, mainly backup. Also i have tested few and found them hard to use and very buggy. It seems that many manufacturer takes FOSS solutions, throw them in to box and call it final product. Instead they should take time to develop and test systemsTue, 09 Jan 2007 07:15:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (Karitku)CommentsRE[4]: Market?http://www.osnews.com/thread?199837
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199837The NSLU2 goes for $100.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 07:20:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (AdamW)Commentslicensehttp://www.osnews.com/thread?199842
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199842how many PC's are allowed to connect?Tue, 09 Jan 2007 08:11:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (netpython)CommentsRE: The last thing we needhttp://www.osnews.com/thread?199845
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199845That was exactly my first thought. I don't think we or the environment really need to have more 24/7 machines running. In one room we replace all light-bulbs with energy-saving ones, in the other room we install a nice new server that someone wants us to have, and that perhaps improves our life a little... but probably not for the long run.

In the office we replace a dozen of servers and virtualize them because we realize the power, heat and environmental implications... and now we just move them to the homes :-(

I'm always wondering how much people *think* about running servers at home. Sure; you learn a lot from it, you have a bit of bandwidth so you can useful things as well... and the server itself was probably not that expensive - but it still consumes more energy (and 200/300 eur/$ a year?) than the average lightbulb you just replaced.

I don't really care about this if it's just the average geek doing this (could be me) - if MS wants every household to have this, I'm much more worried.

And they indeed make good botnets...Tue, 09 Jan 2007 08:16:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (pauld)CommentsDeja vuhttp://www.osnews.com/thread?199848
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199848Isn't he the same guy who wanted 640k ram in my machine? Oh well...Tue, 09 Jan 2007 08:28:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (d_Yn)CommentsMore $, like MCE (well, 05+)http://www.osnews.com/thread?199849
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199849I get the thing, but what I don't get, or like, rather, is MS making another different product for it!

Make a Home and a Pro and leave it at that. Include these features as extra for the Pro, with nice wizards for the job, rather than making another OS product for it. Or have these features in an add-on product.

It's becoming a dizzying array of products, for what appears to be the purpose of turning PCs into appliances by software choices, despite flexibility in hardware.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 08:30:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (cerbie)CommentsRE[7]: Market?http://www.osnews.com/thread?199853
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199853Guys, what I'm arguing is that I don't see WHY Joe User wants a backup server. I can see LOTS of uses for it - in offices and enterprises. You know, "backup" is not a new thing to the industry and lots of proffesionals use it because they actually need it. But WTF, do you really think Joe User is going to think "oooh, a backup device, i'm wasting 500$ on it just in case my hard disk breaks!"?? f--k, joe user doesn't _know_ that hard disks can fail, and he doesn't care.

Well, I think that Joe User does care about backups, but that on its own is not really going to make him shell out money for the server. He would probably just buy some sort of USB drive if he has only one machine.

I think what your argument is missing here, is the family case, where the household has two or more machines (there are three PCs at my house, all in use pretty much all the time). I think this is the market that MS is aiming for. Rather than having a separate backup unit for each one, then this would be a much cheaper and efficient solution.

You could also use one of those NAS drives, but the WHA can also be used to schedule automatic backups for each machine, so the family don't have to remember to save their important stuff. And it looks as if the server is smart enough to figure out the files which are the same on each box, and only save them once; no need to save three complete Windows installations; just the differences between each one. The server also supports versioning as part of the backups, so if Lucy has overwritten her school project folder, she can actually go to the backup, and pick up the individual folder from a given day, and just restore that.

The server can also administer accounts on the network. The network health check is a nice feature as well, you can get an alert when the kids of fiddled with the firewall settings on their machine for example.

Oh, and it allows you to remote desktop into any machine on your network, from any location with an internet connection; Microsoft will apparently be giving a free IP for any WHA owner with a Live! account.

The real question is cost. We're talking about a headless box with a ho-hum processor; I can't really see it costing that much more than a large NAS drive, but we shall see.

Could the same setup be done under Linux? I'm sure it could?

Could Joe User do it under Linux? That, I'm not so sure about.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 08:51:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (Rayz)CommentsRE[2]: Market?http://www.osnews.com/thread?199854
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199854I have a question, dunno if you can answer it or not.

The autobackup is a nice feature, but doesn't that mean leaving all the machines on all the time?

Same with the remote desktop function. When the average user takes his family, on holiday, he doesn't want to leave the other machines in the house switched on, just so that they can remote desktop in.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 09:01:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (Rayz)CommentsRE[5]: Market?http://www.osnews.com/thread?199862
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199862"Easy" as in "connect the large hard drive as the secondary master or externally via USB, right click on the icon in 'My Computer' and set up sharing.".
Although with Linux it will be "install the OS, install Webmin and set up sharing from there", slightly more complex.

Well, that's easy; but how about setting the large hard drive to automatically back up all the connnected machines at midnight?

Or getting it to only back up files that differ on each machine?

Or getting the hard drive to support remote desktops?

Or supporting versioned backups so that the wife can just look at the her backups and pick out one file from one particular date to restore?Edited 2007-01-09 09:33Tue, 09 Jan 2007 09:31:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (Rayz)CommentsHome Server? External back-up drive!http://www.osnews.com/thread?199865
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199865First, most people had no PC.
Then, they had one PC.
Then, their kids had PCs too.
A house full of PCs.
Here comes BG with a 'great' idea: connect all these PCs on a home server.

Now, why would anyone want/need a server, consuming energy, probably making noise too, connected to the TV in order to watch downloaded movies (which is most of the substance in BG's idea), if for a tiny fraction of the cost of all that, you can burn it to a CD or DVD to watch it on the DVD-player that you, usually, already have?

If it's the back-up thing, isn't it...

a) way cheaper,
b) less space-consuming,
c) less energy-consuming,
d) easier to carry around,
e) easier to hide/put in a (fireproof?) vault when you're out of town,
f) perhaps even more reliable,

..to just use an external back-up hard disk drive?
Isn't there a nice program for Windows to periodically, automatically, back-up all photo's, home video's, etc. on such a drive?Tue, 09 Jan 2007 09:43:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (h3rman)CommentsRE: Free Linux NAS solutionhttp://www.osnews.com/thread?199866
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199866.. but it does more than being a dedicated storage server.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 10:08:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (Rayz)CommentsAnyone who uses a Windows &quot;server&quot; ...http://www.osnews.com/thread?199868
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199868... must be insame or has to have too much dough. If I need a server in my home I use a Linux or a Solaris box.

No Windows, no Mac.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 10:29:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (deb2006)CommentsRE[5]: It's a good idea...http://www.osnews.com/thread?199870
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199870Using the APis is less than half the story; FOSS still has to come up with an easy to use system that covers the same functionality.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 10:50:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (Rayz)CommentsRE: Market?http://www.osnews.com/thread?199871
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199871I think they must have just been looking at US markets and how Americans live... not everyone lets there kid have a computer when he's three, not everyone wants to play 'games' on a games console or media centre PC with the family all sitting round waiting for their turn. I can see Ökos wanting this - sitting amongst their wooden toys... this will be something for Assis.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 10:56:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (Coxy)CommentsI agree with Flav2000 (Linksys NS unit)http://www.osnews.com/thread?199872
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199872It's $80, and 2 320GB USB drives, will run you $200 total. That's $280 for 640GB of storage.

And having set up a couple of those and the more expensive Linksys NAS device (EFG250) I doubt they're that much more difficult if at all to set up than WHS would be. It's all web-based, "click here" check boxes.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 11:07:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (polaris20)CommentsRE[8]: Market?http://www.osnews.com/thread?199874
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199874What planet have you been living on? Routers are not common place. Maybe in American Sitcoms where everyone no matter what his job is (be a Street Cleaner or Mechanic) has a three storey House with seven bed rooms and PC's in every children's room from the age of two years old.

Some people who aren't geeks actually do things with their friends and family. Like, go out, talk, cook (meaning to really cook something not having an instant ready meal or sauce). They don't use Playstations or let their children use them... I'm sure even in the US Bill g can find some people like that.

Bill has obviously never lived in the real world... probably stuck in his huge house to afraid to go out because of rogue pies... and has seen to much Tv and thought that's how people really live. Or maybe he just spent to long reading comments from girlfriendless, childless posters on interne forums who assume that parents will want to let their children sit in front of computers, gTue, 09 Jan 2007 11:16:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (Coxy)CommentsRE[8]: Market?http://www.osnews.com/thread?199875
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199875What planet have you been living on? Routers are not common place. Maybe in American Sitcoms where everyone no matter what his job is (be a Street Cleaner or Mechanic) has a three storey House with seven bed rooms and PC's in every children's room from the age of two years old.

Some people who aren't geeks actually do things with their friends and family. Like, go out, talk, cook (meaning to really cook something not having an instant ready meal or sauce). They don't use Playstations or let their children use them... I'm sure even in the US Bill g can find some people like that.

Bill has obviously never lived in the real world... probably stuck in his huge house to afraid to go out because of rogue pies... and has seen to much Tv and thought that's how people really live. Or maybe he just spent to long reading comments from girlfriendless, childless posters on internet forums who assume that parents will want to let their children sit in front of computers all day gamingTue, 09 Jan 2007 11:18:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (Coxy)CommentsLess than $500?http://www.osnews.com/thread?199876
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199876No problem, as long as you don't use Windows. A versatile home server can easily be built using a Mini-ITX system and Linux/BSD.

Honestly though, an entry-level Mac Mini works like a charm as a home server. Small, silent and easily expandable by adding an Iomega MiniMax or a LaCie Mini.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 11:22:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (DevL)CommentsRoaming Profileshttp://www.osnews.com/thread?199879
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199879One feature i would have liked to have seen in the home server is roaming profiles. The ability for users on the network to hot seat between all of their computer's whilst keeping their settings and files.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 12:01:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (REM2000)CommentsYou need this - the man sayshttp://www.osnews.com/thread?199884
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199884But I wonder... Do I?

Say I have 5+ computer's at home. Most probably I'm somewhat geeky and have my own solution for a home server... and it probably isn't Windows based.

Or it may be I've got 2-3 computers under my roof. Maybe it's mine, my partner's and the kids'. Maybe it's mine and my brother's. Or I'm sharing an appartment with a couple other students and we have each our own. Most of the time, we won't want a home server. I do not, ever, trust what my roommates may have in their machines. Much less what the kids do. I gave them their own computer so that they wouldn't touch my stuff.
Sure, we all share our internet connection, but that's it.

Perhaps there's only one box at home, you know "the computer", which is still pretty common. I'm certainly not going to buy a home server.

No, I'm not saying no-one would want this. There's, as has been said, the guy who wants to set up a multimedia hub (but would probably be better off with other solutions which do exist already and are cheaper), or that couple who work at home together each with their own machine (though they probably use Macs but that's another story). Yes, there may be a market for something like this.... but yes, it is quite limited.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 12:22:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (gonzalo)CommentsOf course Gates wants a server in every homehttp://www.osnews.com/thread?199885
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199885How else can he eliminate the Mac/Linux enemy and take complete control of our lives, if not by creating an unnecessary dependency between the PC and the server?

As days pass by, I believe more and more strongly that MS does intend to eliminate software as a product and create a client-server method of computing, where no software is actually installed on a user's PC, and programs are executed through net servers which only MS and their "licensed software distributers" provide software for. That's not some crazy idea I have, that's what they said in a MS Israel lecture over here about a year back.

"Mikrosopht. Because we control you!"Tue, 09 Jan 2007 12:26:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (ido50)CommentsRE: Ta but no ta very muchhttp://www.osnews.com/thread?199887
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199887Yes, I'm aware that the above sounds arrogant and flamebaity as f***. But honestly, I don't see the point of this.

Is it possible that it isn't being aimed at you?Tue, 09 Jan 2007 12:32:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (Rayz)CommentsSo Gates Wants a Server in Every Home?http://www.osnews.com/thread?199888
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199888//a consumer device to serve as a central storage place for digital photos, music and other media. ... The goal is to get devices that can cost less than USD 500.//

The very best bit ... no Windows either.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 12:42:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (hal2k1)Commentsalready done thathttp://www.osnews.com/thread?199890
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199890A few weeks back I bought a dual P111 tower server on ebay Australia for the equavalent of USD90 plus another USD10 for a 5.1 soundcard and a cheap Nvidia AGP video card.

I simply inserted The Ubuntu dapper disk and restarted. All my hardware was automatically detected. The only likely issue is buying a supported wireless card. The RAID array appears as a single disk "sda1" and you simply follow a normal installation with a separate "home" folder . It is a simple matter of going to www.ubuntuguide.org and following the multimedia installation howtos. Mint Linux, a multimedia-enabled Ubuntu fork, is also available as a download.

Linux also supports mirrored software RAID if you have a couple of ATA disks.

Proper servers are far better than regular desktops for media servers because the components (ECC ram, fans, power supplies, motherboards, SCSI disks) used are designed for continuous use and are far better quality than in mainstream desktops. No cheap ATA/SATA disk will survive long with continuous use. A passively cooled $2 Geforce 2 is quite adequate as video card.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 12:56:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (misterdirk)CommentsRE[2]: ?http://www.osnews.com/thread?199901
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199901 And if he can deliver the features I want, he may get some of my money.

Yes, if he could deliver some of the features I wanted at a decent price with decent functionality that you can't get cheaper and with more assurance of it actually [/i]working[/i] once in a while, he might get some of mine, too.

Yurtle, read Willy G., sits on the top of his turtle stack. His next target ... a MickeySoft logo on the moon.

I find it so humorous that when Apple as-well-as other business and Linux does something interesting MickeySoft `innovates`.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 14:03:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (aGNUstic)CommentsRE[8]: It's a good idea...http://www.osnews.com/thread?199907
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199907I know you're a die-hard MS supporter, but that doesn't change the fact that MS has a hard time penetrating new markets,

It's not a new market though is it? It's an extension of a market that they pretty much own; home users. Can't see how a Linux-based solution is going to get around that. If Linux was making any headway on the home desktop, then it would have a chance.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 14:11:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (Rayz)CommentsRE[6]: It's a good idea...http://www.osnews.com/thread?199909
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199909We're talking about a server here. All you need is a good web interface. As far as functionality goes, it's not rocket science. Please provide some actual arguments to support your unbridled enthusiasm for all things MS.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 14:34:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (archiesteel)CommentsRE[9]: It's a good idea...http://www.osnews.com/thread?199910
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199910It's an extension of a market that they pretty much own; home users.

No, it's an extension of a market where they are just one of many players: servers.

Can't see how a Linux-based solution is going to get around that.

That's because your pro-MS bias is keeping you from seeing the big picture: it doesn't matter what the NAS device runs. All it needs to do is communicate with the Windows clients, and guess what? Linux already does that.

If Linux was making any headway on the home desktop, then it would have a chance.

That's completely irrelevant. Note that such a NAS device doesn't even have to run Linux. It could run one of the BSDs, or Solaris (or even OS X if Apple decided to put one out). Of course, using a FOSS OS would mean lower costs for the manufacturer, increasing profits (and providing stiff competition for MS).

What do you think runs all those Linksys hardware routers you find everywhere? That's right. Linux.

Thanks for playing.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 14:41:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (archiesteel)CommentsRE[8]: It's a good idea...http://www.osnews.com/thread?199911
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199911MCE has nothing on set-top box like TiVO and other PVR devices used by cable companies.

Many more people have TiVOs than MCE (even if they're not exactly the same thing). Using MCE as a "success story" is not a very strong argument.

Many advanced users who have used competing products for their free cost of acquisition and/or tweakability have either switched completely to MCE or chosen it as the system they use for their family, in part, because it was less hassle, well integrated, and well supported.

You have absolutely no proof to back that statement up.

The fanboyism on this page is reaching new heights of hipocrisy.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 14:45:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (archiesteel)CommentsRE[9]: Market?http://www.osnews.com/thread?199912
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199912What planet have you been living on? Routers are not common place.

I can go into walmart and buy a linksys WRT54G - That makes em' pretty common place in my book.

Maybe in American Sitcoms where everyone no matter what his job is (be a Street Cleaner or Mechanic)

Maybe its just america in general because the street cleaners and mechanics I know DO have multiple computers in their homes.

Some people who aren't geeks actually do things with their friends and family. Like, go out, talk, cook (meaning to really cook something not having an instant ready meal or sauce). They don't use Playstations or let their children use them... I'm sure even in the US Bill g can find some people like that.

Some people who are geeks do the same things, its a mute point.

People without playstations and multiple computers are obviously NOT the market MS is shooting for.

I'm sure there are plenty of homeless people who don't even own a computer on the streets, should I automatically assume there is no market for this device based on this sad truth?

I know people right now, that if the device is easy to setup and use (I've got my doubts on that one) would fit the target market for something like this.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 14:45:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (Bit_Rapist)CommentsRE: licensehttp://www.osnews.com/thread?199913
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199913That's a very good question.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 14:46:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (archiesteel)CommentsRE[8]: Market?http://www.osnews.com/thread?199914
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199914Could the same setup be done under Linux? I'm sure it could?

Could Joe User do it under Linux? That, I'm not so sure about.

It's going to be a web-based interface for both anyway. The user would never know he's using Linux in the first place.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 14:49:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (archiesteel)CommentsRE[9]: Market?http://www.osnews.com/thread?199916
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199916What planet have you been living on? Routers are not common place.

Actually, they are increasinly common. Don't forget that every new laptop sold comes with WiFi now, and many people who buy them also get a wireless router for home.

Of course, if you look at the entire population it's still a small percentage, but routers are no longer strictly geek territory. You should see the amount they sell at Future Shop during the holiday season...Tue, 09 Jan 2007 14:59:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (archiesteel)CommentsRE: So Gates Wants a Server in Every Home?http://www.osnews.com/thread?199919
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199919$179. No DRM. Perfect.

To be fair, the device doesn't do everything that WHS does out-of-the-box, however it shows that Linksys and others do have a leg up on MS as far as this market is concerned.

You do bring up a good point, though. No DRM. Seeing as how Vista is crippled with DRM, it's a reasonably question to ask: will WHS also support MS' submissive stance towards Hollywood and the RIAA?Tue, 09 Jan 2007 15:04:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (archiesteel)CommentsRE: Anyone who uses a Windows &quot;server&quot; ...http://www.osnews.com/thread?199921
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199921... must be insame or has to have too much dough. If I need a server in my home I use a Linux or a Solaris box.

No Windows, no Mac.

Thats neat but it has absolutely nothing to do with the article or what is being discussed.

Thanks for playing though.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 15:11:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (Bit_Rapist)CommentsRE: Less than $500?http://www.osnews.com/thread?199932
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199932Honestly though, an entry-level Mac Mini works like a charm as a home server. Small, silent and easily expandable by adding an Iomega MiniMax or a LaCie Mini.

Sounds like a pretty pricey server with limited storage space out of the box.

For the same money you could get a NAS (granted with more limited functionality) solution from someone else with prob 500 or more gigabytes.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 15:28:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (Bit_Rapist)CommentsRE[5]: Market?http://www.osnews.com/thread?199955
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199955Oy vey. Have you actually read any of the articles?

"WHS aggregates all of the storage attached to the server into a single store pool, regardless of whether that storage is internal, external, or a combination. As you add drives to the server, the available storage pool simply increases. [...] Data is mirrored at the shared folder level, so that two copies of a folder are always stored on two different physical hard drives. It's quite different from RAID, Headrick says."Tue, 09 Jan 2007 16:23:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (Adam S)CommentsRE: licensehttp://www.osnews.com/thread?199992
http://www.osnews.com/thread?199992how many PC's are allowed to connect?

10.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 18:35:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (n4cer)CommentsWorld Dominationhttp://www.osnews.com/thread?200017
http://www.osnews.com/thread?200017Blah! Why MS? There are already plenty of NAS solutions out there that are much cheaper. Just because Bill Gates has a smart home doesn't mean anybody else wants (or cares) for one.

MS will eventually try to squeeze out Tivo...cable television companies....telephone companies...

Just like they did w/ the XBox in the video game industry. World domination is the MS goal.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 19:32:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (jgotsch)CommentsRE[10]: It's a good idea...http://www.osnews.com/thread?200035
http://www.osnews.com/thread?200035No, it's an extension of a market where they are just one of many players: servers.

Yes, I see your problem.
You believe marketing is about technology; that's the kind of thinking that nearly killed Apple and caused Vista to hit the skids a few years back.
Here's a clue, marketing is about people. There is no market for servers, there is a market made up of folk who have more than one PC in their home, who want to share their videos, photos and music, want to have the whole lot backed up without any fuss or complication, want to access their machines remotely.

Now can you tell me which Linux solution can be set up for desktop remoting, versioned backups that will allow the kids to just point at a version of the file they want and restore it, backup a set of PCs automatically, allow the addition of extra disks to a virtual pool at a click of mouse and allow whole machines to be restored within an hour from smart backups that only record the different files between various machines AND can be set up and run by my gran?

That's because your pro-MS bias is keeping you from seeing the big picture:

Rule Number 76743394:112 from the Anyone But MS handbook - As soon as you see your argument collapsing, immediately throw out the 'MS-bias' argument. With any luck, this is a winning strategy for a number of reasons:

1. While the other party is floored by your deep, almost Jedi-like insight into his psyche, you can read up and do some more research to find that Linux-based solution that almost fits the bill. And remember, even if you have to research two dozen command line incantations to make it work, you must insist that your mother could do it, and it will ten time better than the 'MS' solution. And don't forget the '$'; that reinforces the idea that Microsoft is in fact, the anti-christ.

2. If number 1 fails, then you may get lucky; the other party may feel so insulted that the whole thread descends into a slanging match, and everyone will forget that your argument was failing.

3. If number 2 fails, then persist with the 'MS bias' accusations in the hope that other ABMers will join in and help you out.

it doesn't matter what the NAS device runs. All it needs to do is communicate with the Windows clients, and guess what? Linux already does that.

Yes, but could Joe Public be bothered to set up this kind of functionality on a Linux system? And it's not just a matter of backing up. What's involved in setting up automatic backups, securing folders, remote desktops, versioning, checks to make sure Johnny hasn't turned off the firewall on his Windows PC?

If Linux was making any headway on the home desktop, then it would have a chance.

That's completely irrelevant.

Not really. Because this will be much more successful than any Linux based solution for much the same reason that Windows continues to be more successful than Linux on the desktop; MS makes the effort to understand the needs of the home user. Once the Linux folk get that, then we'll see some real competition on the desktop.

I mean would it be so hard to say 'right, let's just focus on ONE distro and market the hell out of it. Let's all work together and tell Joe Public that this is the universal Linux.'

???

Sorry, I'm drifting.

Note that such a NAS device doesn't even have to run Linux. It could run one of the BSDs, or Solaris (or even OS X if Apple decided to put one out). Of course, using a FOSS OS would mean lower costs for the manufacturer, increasing profits (and providing stiff competition for MS).

Yeah, but even though you are desperately trying to ignore th fact; this is much more than a NAS device.

What do you think runs all those Linksys hardware routers you find everywhere? That's right. Linux.

Dear oh dear ...Tue, 09 Jan 2007 19:51:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (Rayz)CommentsRE[9]: It's a good idea...http://www.osnews.com/thread?200068
http://www.osnews.com/thread?200068Actually TMK Linux is already here... Your DVR, your network storage device and your router are somewhat likely to be running a customized linux.
It's just not there by branding, which is what Microsoft is shooting for. Linux, instead, is hidden behind the brand. Also, these devices are only now beginning to get popular.
And Microsoft wants you to buy general pc hardware to do this instead of custom hardware for the job (usually designed to only do what's needed and nothing more for cost purposes where Microsoft likely hopes to beat the prices by simple mass production driven by mass marketing and strong brand support).Tue, 09 Jan 2007 20:32:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (ma_d)CommentsRE[11]: It's a good idea...http://www.osnews.com/thread?200099
http://www.osnews.com/thread?200099What a whole lot of nothing you wrote there.

You're apparently under the assumption that this is *software* product. It's not. It's a *hardware* product. So any reference to "Linux distros" or "Linux system" is completely irrelevant, just like the fact that a Linksys router runs on Linux is irrelevant to those who buy it. The fact that there are many distros out there means nothing to hardware manufacturers, because they don't use actual distros in the first place - they tailor the OS to suit their need.

Oh, and I didn't mention the "MS bias" because I ran out of argument. It was merely a statement of fact: all of your posts are heavily pro-MS, therefore it is my opinion that your obvious pro-MS bias is preventing your from seeing the big picture here: in this context, Linux is more attractive to *manufacturers*, not users (who might never know that the device runs Linux, or another FOSS OS for that matter).

Yeah, but even though you are desperately trying to ignore th fact; this is much more than a NAS device.

Fundamentally, it's not. It's an embedded device with network capabilities and storage device. The extra services it provides can be programmed in - the box itself is a NAS device, whether you like it or not.

So, you're comparing the functionality of this thing, to a router?

No, I'm not. I'm drawing a parrallel between something that used to be done by generic PCs (routers and firewalls) which is now done by a standalone device. What MS is proposing is no different.

If you want to offer counter-arguments, at least make the effort of understanding what my arguments are in the first place.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 21:19:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (archiesteel)CommentsRE[6]: Market?http://www.osnews.com/thread?200100
http://www.osnews.com/thread?200100I hadn't read through it when I wrote the first message, I read that part afterward. That's the only thing I saw that I thought was pretty cool about MS's offering...is it enough to stave off the competition? I doubt it.Tue, 09 Jan 2007 21:21:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (archiesteel)CommentsRE[8]: It's a good idea...http://www.osnews.com/thread?200102
http://www.osnews.com/thread?200102So, in other words, you *dont* have any arguments to support the actual statement?